2015-06-04 9:34 GMT+02:00 Petr Stodulka <pstodulk@xxxxxxxxxx>: > > > On 3.6.2015 15:35, Todd Zullinger wrote: > > Josh Boyer wrote: > > On Wed, Jun 3, 2015 at 9:19 AM, Petr Stodulka <pstodulk@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On 3.6.2015 13:56, Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote: > > [...] > > What about adopting something similar to what has been done for the R > package, There is R-core, R-java R-devel and R. If you yum/dnf install R you > get all of them and you can install either one independently. > > So in this case, we could have git-core, git-perl, git-foo and yum/dnf > install git would provides the full experience, while the atomic folks rely > on git-core instead. > > [...] > > Thank you Pierre, that sounds reasonably. We could create packages > *git-core* & *git-perl* sub-packages and both required inside original *git* > package. So user will be able to use still same functionality as usually > without troubles, even after upgrade (doesn't count upstream changes). And > Atomic will use *git-core* package. Are you OK with this solution Colin? > > > This is somewhat funny, since we already _had_ git-core long ago for this > very reason, and it was consolidated into a single git package. History > repeats itself. > > > Indeed. We now have a git-all metapackage which pulls in all of the git > subpackages, which is a lot¹. Many of the subpackages are only useful for > integration with other SCM systems, and that is certainly a good reason to > have them not pulled in by default. > > I do think that the default git package should continue to pull in the few > core parts which rely on perl. They might not be used by folks wanting a > very minimal build, but they are quite commonly used by plenty of git users. > > I think in addition to git-all which pulls in everything, a git-minimal (or > git-core, if we want to repeat history) would be better than stripping the > perl-dependencies from the default git install. > > ¹ Here is the current list of subpackages from master: > > emacs-git > emacs-git-el > git-all > git-cvs > git-daemon > git-email > git-gui > gitk > git-p4 > git-svn > gitweb > perl-Git > perl-Git-SVN > > > > OK, packages are split. Todd, can you check description texts and peculiarly > change it if you found mistakes or better description you devise? I think > about separate package git-core-doc (or git-doc, which will contains all doc > files of git-core and git). Doc files of other subpackages could be kept > without moving. > I may be wrong but I don't see the point in splitting the doc too. People needing the git-core subpackages to save space are likely not to install documentation. End-users who will use the doc, will end up installing the git package Regards, H. > -- > devel mailing list > devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel > Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
